Complementary Feeding Practices in 80 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Prevalence of and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Dietary Diversity, Meal Frequency, and Dietary Adequacy

G. Gatica-Domínguez, P. A. Neves, A. Barros, C. Victora
{"title":"Complementary Feeding Practices in 80 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Prevalence of and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Dietary Diversity, Meal Frequency, and Dietary Adequacy","authors":"G. Gatica-Domínguez, P. A. Neves, A. Barros, C. Victora","doi":"10.1101/2020.12.01.20241372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. To describe patterns and socioeconomic inequalities in complementary feeding practices among children aged 6-23 months in 80 low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods. We analyzed national surveys carried out since 2010. Complementary feeding indicators for children aged 6-23 months included minimum dietary diversity (MDD), minimum meal frequency (MMF) and minimum acceptable diet (MAD). Between- and within-country inequalities were documented using relative (wealth deciles) and absolute (estimated household income) socioeconomic indicators. Results. Only 21.3%, 56.2% and 10.1% of the 80 countries showed prevalence levels above 50% for MDD, MMF and MAD, respectively. Western & Central Africa showed the lowest prevalence for all indicators, whereas the highest for MDD and MAD was Latin America & Caribbean, and for MMF in East Asia & the Pacific. Log per capita gross domestic product was positively associated with MDD (R2 = 48.5%), MMF (28.2%) and MAD (41.4%). Pro-rich within-country inequalities were observed in most countries for the three indicators; pro-poor inequalities were observed in two countries for MMF, and in none for the other two indicators. Breastmilk was the only type of food with a pro-poor distribution, whereas animal-source foods (dairy products, flesh foods and eggs) showed the most pronounced pro-rich inequality. Dietary diversity improved sharply when absolute annual household incomes exceeded about US$20,000. There were no consistent differences among boys and girls for any of the indicators studied. Conclusion. Monitoring complementary feeding indicators in the world and implementing policies and programs to reduce wealth related inequalities are essential to achieve optimal child nutrition.","PeriodicalId":22788,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"45","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.01.20241372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 45

Abstract

Objective. To describe patterns and socioeconomic inequalities in complementary feeding practices among children aged 6-23 months in 80 low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods. We analyzed national surveys carried out since 2010. Complementary feeding indicators for children aged 6-23 months included minimum dietary diversity (MDD), minimum meal frequency (MMF) and minimum acceptable diet (MAD). Between- and within-country inequalities were documented using relative (wealth deciles) and absolute (estimated household income) socioeconomic indicators. Results. Only 21.3%, 56.2% and 10.1% of the 80 countries showed prevalence levels above 50% for MDD, MMF and MAD, respectively. Western & Central Africa showed the lowest prevalence for all indicators, whereas the highest for MDD and MAD was Latin America & Caribbean, and for MMF in East Asia & the Pacific. Log per capita gross domestic product was positively associated with MDD (R2 = 48.5%), MMF (28.2%) and MAD (41.4%). Pro-rich within-country inequalities were observed in most countries for the three indicators; pro-poor inequalities were observed in two countries for MMF, and in none for the other two indicators. Breastmilk was the only type of food with a pro-poor distribution, whereas animal-source foods (dairy products, flesh foods and eggs) showed the most pronounced pro-rich inequality. Dietary diversity improved sharply when absolute annual household incomes exceeded about US$20,000. There were no consistent differences among boys and girls for any of the indicators studied. Conclusion. Monitoring complementary feeding indicators in the world and implementing policies and programs to reduce wealth related inequalities are essential to achieve optimal child nutrition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
80个低收入和中等收入国家的辅食做法:膳食多样性、用餐频率和膳食充足性方面的普遍存在和社会经济不平等
目标。描述80个低收入和中等收入国家6-23月龄儿童补充喂养方式的模式和社会经济不平等。方法。我们分析了自2010年以来进行的全国调查。6-23月龄儿童补充喂养指标包括最低膳食多样性(MDD)、最低用餐频率(MMF)和最低可接受膳食(MAD)。使用相对(财富十分位数)和绝对(估计家庭收入)社会经济指标记录了国家之间和国家内部的不平等。结果。在80个国家中,分别只有21.3%、56.2%和10.1%的国家显示重度抑郁症、MMF和MAD的患病率高于50%。西非和中非的所有指标患病率最低,拉丁美洲和加勒比的MDD和MAD患病率最高,东亚和太平洋的MMF患病率最高。Log人均国内生产总值与MDD (R2 = 48.5%)、MMF(28.2%)和MAD(41.4%)呈正相关。大多数国家在这三个指标上都观察到有利于富人的国内不平等现象;有两个国家在MMF方面观察到有利于穷人的不平等,而在其他两个指标方面则没有。母乳是唯一一种有利于穷人的食物,而动物源食品(乳制品、肉类食品和鸡蛋)则显示出最明显的有利于富人的不平等。当家庭年收入绝对超过约2万美元时,饮食多样性急剧改善。在研究的任何指标中,男孩和女孩之间都没有一致的差异。结论。监测世界各地的补充喂养指标,实施减少与财富相关的不平等现象的政策和规划,对于实现最佳儿童营养至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Relationship between adherence to the 2019 Canada's Food Guide recommendations on healthy food choices and nutrient intakes in older adults Comparison of Anemia Screening Methods Using Paired Venous Samples in Women of Reproductive Age in Southern India. Limitations of the Food Compass Nutrient Profiling System. Call for Emergency Action to Limit Global Temperature Increases, Restore Biodiversity, and Protect Health Child Autistic Traits, Food Selectivity, and Diet Quality: A Population-Based Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1